Skip to main content

Full text of "Rapid Population Growth Consequences And Policy Implications"

See other formats

requirements needed to effect a rapid increase in enrollment rates is formidable enough even in the absence of population growth. This in no sense weakens the case for population control. It merely underlines the point that a country such as Pakistan would find it impossible to provide universal, high quality education within a decade or two even if fertility were to decline quite rapidly.
Even in the Republic of Korea, where universal primary education has almost been attained, it will not be easy to reach the desired standards of education quickly. The share of the GNP needed for education is likely to rise sharply from an already high figure if the coverage and quality of education are to be improved further, even if there is a modest decline in fertility (37).
Before the discussion of the policy implications of this analysis, this section will deal with some feedbacks and relationships that have a bearing on policy decisions. The flow diagram (Figure 5) represents an attempt to summarize an extraordinarily complex set of interactions among educational progress, fertility decline, and other elements in the process of economic devel-
Figure 5. Some interactions among education, economic development, and fertility in a developing country.
Tn 1 QQft
in thfi hicrh fertility case is 38.5 oercent, 29.9rollment rates are raised, and by 9.4 percent if pupil/teacher rates arehe non-teacher salary component of recurrent costs raised, education's share of the GNP climbs to 6 percent and above by 1985, even if fertility declines rapidly. This figure does not include the costs of higher education, including teacher training, which will also be increasing and might well account for a further 1 or 2 percent of GNP by the end of the projection period. At the present time 8 percent of GNP is as much as any country in the world spends on education, and although it would not be impossible for Pakistan to reach this level from the 1.7 percent of GNP actually spent on education in 1965, this would require a very basic reordering of priorities.